He failed to qualify for next week’s presidential debate, is bleeding cash, and is on a mere nine state ballots, reducing his chances to, “essentially nil.”
I’m no RFK supporter, but that shit was muckraking by NYT. Granted, I question his choice in using the excuse of having a worm in his brain to avoid paying alimony to his ex-wife, but it wasn’t being reported honestly and they acted like this was some new revelation that happened in the last few years rather than well over a decade ago.
RFK is not electable, but I will concede that I like three of his positions quite a bit:
Money out of politics
Housing and barring corporate ownership of single-occupancy homes
Cutting defense spending
He’s got so many issues that keep him from being a serious contender, but those three subjects are important and he stands on the right side in that regard.
It seems the editors weren’t able to reach his worm for comment
I’m no RFK supporter, but that shit was muckraking by NYT. Granted, I question his choice in using the excuse of having a worm in his brain to avoid paying alimony to his ex-wife, but it wasn’t being reported honestly and they acted like this was some new revelation that happened in the last few years rather than well over a decade ago.
RFK is not electable, but I will concede that I like three of his positions quite a bit:
He’s got so many issues that keep him from being a serious contender, but those three subjects are important and he stands on the right side in that regard.
He’s a whacko but I agree with you on those 3 items, nice.